Towards the end of class Dr. Williamson asked, "What kind of relationship does Corinne imagine for them and why is his version of it so different?" In my close reading of Chapter V in Book IX, I believe their argument is a manifestation of this question.
Corinne states the entire foundation of their argument at the start of the chapter: “Your religion is harsh and solemn, ours is lively and affectionate” (175). She instantly creates this comparison of “liberal” versus “absolute; of “love” versus “duty” and the reader cannot help but place the two characters in those binary roles as well. After a close read, I realize their continual debate is under the surface, personal and deliberate. When Stael writes on the difference of the English Catholicism and the Italian Catholicism, she uses the characters as tools to prune the garden she has dug, planted, and nursed. This back and forth comparison continues as a direct argument against Corinne and Italy’s morals and values in general. The “lavishness” is looked down upon by Oswald and England, and is celebrated by Corinne and Italy. She does this throughout Corinne, creating a deep and rich discussion of cultures and ideas during her time. What I find particularly interesting are the personal digs each character gets in when discussing religion, very similarly to when they looked at art, drama, and literature.
Oswald argues, “The purest religion is one which makes the sacrifice of our passions and the performance of our duties a continual homage to the Supreme Being” (177). This plenitude is what he dislikes about her religious practices, yet loves her very being for it. This is a pattern of speech the two have had throughout. Oswald is so torn by his feelings and inability to act and react sensibly at times. He “loves” Corinne but asks himself continually, at what cost? This internal conflict is one shared with Corinne because in loving Oswald, she has somehow lost herself. Oswald even collapses to his knees so influenced by her words and the “heavenly inspiration animated Corinne’s countenance.” In this sense “passion” is still accepted as a level of devoutness, both of which take the place of the performance that is too lavish in his opinion (180). He eventually states this in its simplest form to Corinne, “I venture to say that the poetic enthusiasm which makes you so attractive is not the healthiest way of being devout” (180). This made me laugh actually, at the constant absurd way he is torn between what he ultimately loves and appreciated about her, to what morals and guidelines he was taught to follow. I wonder if maybe he is detached a bit from her poetess-self since she’s struggled in improvisation for some time now.
In closing, it is interesting to note how full circle their debate comes at the end of this short chapter when they witness the great assembly fall to their knees when the Pope blesses them. It is said, “through their emotion at that moment, Corinne and Lord Nevil felt that all forms of worship are alike” (182). I found this also humorous since it is the emotion, and maybe nothing else now, that binds them. Reduction: We began our discussion of Frankenstein by questioning our critical frame, and this concept became my main focus in my paper last week. We cannot help but come into a reading with an established frame, so it is our mindfulness which is important. If we are aware of our prejudices and influences before reading, I believe it will be easier to detach oneself and keep from reducing the story. As close readers we will always dissect the novel into bits and parts, it is our job! But even as I write this I realize in asking us to do a close reading, we are forced to look beyond the text, pulling in our own personal knowledge and creating inferences which "overcooks" the words until they are reduced into another thing entirely.
June 11-Winar
June 9/2014
Towards the end of class Dr. Williamson asked, "What kind of relationship does Corinne imagine for them and why is his version of it so different?" In my close reading of Chapter V in Book IX, I believe their argument is a manifestation of this question.Corinne states the entire foundation of their argument at the start of the chapter: “Your religion is harsh and solemn, ours is lively and affectionate” (175). She instantly creates this comparison of “liberal” versus “absolute; of “love” versus “duty” and the reader cannot help but place the two characters in those binary roles as well. After a close read, I realize their continual debate is under the surface, personal and deliberate. When Stael writes on the difference of the English Catholicism and the Italian Catholicism, she uses the characters as tools to prune the garden she has dug, planted, and nursed. This back and forth comparison continues as a direct argument against Corinne and Italy’s morals and values in general. The “lavishness” is looked down upon by Oswald and England, and is celebrated by Corinne and Italy. She does this throughout Corinne, creating a deep and rich discussion of cultures and ideas during her time. What I find particularly interesting are the personal digs each character gets in when discussing religion, very similarly to when they looked at art, drama, and literature.
Oswald argues, “The purest religion is one which makes the sacrifice of our passions and the performance of our duties a continual homage to the Supreme Being” (177). This plenitude is what he dislikes about her religious practices, yet loves her very being for it. This is a pattern of speech the two have had throughout. Oswald is so torn by his feelings and inability to act and react sensibly at times. He “loves” Corinne but asks himself continually, at what cost? This internal conflict is one shared with Corinne because in loving Oswald, she has somehow lost herself. Oswald even collapses to his knees so influenced by her words and the “heavenly inspiration animated Corinne’s countenance.” In this sense “passion” is still accepted as a level of devoutness, both of which take the place of the performance that is too lavish in his opinion (180). He eventually states this in its simplest form to Corinne, “I venture to say that the poetic enthusiasm which makes you so attractive is not the healthiest way of being devout” (180). This made me laugh actually, at the constant absurd way he is torn between what he ultimately loves and appreciated about her, to what morals and guidelines he was taught to follow. I wonder if maybe he is detached a bit from her poetess-self since she’s struggled in improvisation for some time now.
In closing, it is interesting to note how full circle their debate comes at the end of this short chapter when they witness the great assembly fall to their knees when the Pope blesses them. It is said, “through their emotion at that moment, Corinne and Lord Nevil felt that all forms of worship are alike” (182). I found this also humorous since it is the emotion, and maybe nothing else now, that binds them.
Reduction: We began our discussion of Frankenstein by questioning our critical frame, and this concept became my main focus in my paper last week. We cannot help but come into a reading with an established frame, so it is our mindfulness which is important. If we are aware of our prejudices and influences before reading, I believe it will be easier to detach oneself and keep from reducing the story. As close readers we will always dissect the novel into bits and parts, it is our job! But even as I write this I realize in asking us to do a close reading, we are forced to look beyond the text, pulling in our own personal knowledge and creating inferences which "overcooks" the words until they are reduced into another thing entirely.